Patna High Court
Satyam KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court held that, in view of the lack of specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR and the presence of mitigating circumstances, anticipatory bail could be granted subject to conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Satyam Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a FIR alleging that he and an associate fired at an informant, violating several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act. The petitioner contended that the FIR does not specifically allege his participation in the shooting and that only the associate was seen with the pistol, further noting his prior convictions under the Excise Act. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The court examined the FIR, the lack of explicit incrimination of the petitioner, and his criminal antecedents, and concluded that anticipatory bail could be granted. Accordingly, the court ordered release on anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and specific conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The order also stipulated that any breach of conditions could lead to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the allegations in the FIR.
- Whether the FIR contains a specific allegation against the petitioner sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents under the Excise Act affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 118, 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- FIR
- false implication
- firearms offence
- criminal antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68813 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2025 Thana- BARGAINIA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Satyam Kumar, S/o Devanand Sah @ Devanand Prasad Gupta, Resident of
Village- Bargania, Ward No. 11, Mai Asthan, P.S.- Bairgania, District-
Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
6 21-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Bairgania P.S. Case No. 76 of 2025 registered
for the offence(s) under Section(s) 126(2), 118, 109, 352, 351(2)
and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.) and
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that the petitioner along with one Suman Kumar abused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68813 of 2025(6) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
him and thereafter took out a pistol and fired upon him, which
hit him on his thigh. It is further alleged that the
accused/Suman Kumar with pistol in his hand threatened the
informant to kill the entire family.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and on
perusal of the F.I.R., it would be evident that there is no specific
allegation of firing upon the petitioner. It has been submitted
that from the averment made in the F.I.R., it would be evident
that it was the accused/Suman Kumar who had the pistol in his
hand while he was fleeing and nothing has been stated as far as
the petitioner is concerned. It is also submitted that there is only
one firearm injury on the left thigh, which goes to suggest that it
was only the accused/Suman Kumar who had fired and not the
petitioner. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner carries
two criminal antecedents against his name and both are under
the Excise Act.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68813 of 2025(6) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
the petitioner, above-named, be released on anticipatory bail, in
the event of his arrest or surrender before the concerned
Court/successor Court within a period of four weeks from today,
on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the concerned Court/successor Court where the
case is pending in connection with Bairgania P.S. Case No. 76
of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with
corresponding Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) as well as subject to the
following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his
close relative and the other shall be a local resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the
trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the concerned
Court.
(iv) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is
found that he has concealed his criminal antecedent, the
Court concerned shall take necessary steps for cancellation
of his bail bond. However, the acceptance of bail bond in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed
for purpose of or in the name of verification.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68813 of 2025(6) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
U T
Checking your session…